GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce4 MX 4000

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot rated266
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data39.19
Power efficiencyno data18.91
ArchitectureCelsius (1999−2005)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNV18 A4TU117
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date14 December 2003 (20 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data896
Core clock speed250 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1665 MHz
Number of transistors29 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rate1.00093.24
Floating-point processing powerno data2.984 TFLOPS
ROPs232
TMUs456

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 3.0 x16
Length168 mm229 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDRGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount128 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed166 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth2.656 GB/s128.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x VGA1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX8.012 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGL1.34.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA-7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce4 MX 4000 4
GTX 1650 7870
+196650%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 14 December 2003 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 150 nm 12 nm

GTX 1650 has an age advantage of 15 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1150% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce4 MX 4000 and GeForce GTX 1650. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce4 MX 4000
GeForce4 MX 4000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


5 938 votes

Rate GeForce4 MX 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 23314 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.